Hepatitis E masquerading as drug-induced liver injury

The Unmet Needs of Hepatitis E Virus Diagnosis in Suspected Drug-Induced Liver Injury in Limited Resource Setting

Background: Currently, there are no specific biomarkers for drug-induced liver injury (DILI), and the diagnosis of DILI is based mainly on the exclusion of other causes of liver dysfunction and the recognition of potential causative drugs. Hepatitis E virus (HEV) diagnosis is not routinely enrolled in many countries, and HEV infection could be misdiagnosed as DILI.

Methodology: We retrospectively analyzed plasma samples (n = 80) collected from suspected DILI for HEV markers such as anti-HEV IgM, anti-HEV IgG, and HEV RNA. Anti-HEV antibodies were assessed using commercial ELISA kits. HEV RNA was tested by RT-qPCR targeting HEV ORF2/3, the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was plotted, and a putative threshold for liver function parameters was determined.

Results: Out of 80 samples, 12 samples were positive for anti-HEV IgM and anti-HEV IgG, and HEV RNA was detected in seven samples. The median viral load was 3.46 × 10³ IU/ml, and the isolated viruses belonged to HEV genotype 1. The level of liver enzymes such as alanine transaminase (ALT) and aspartate transaminase (AST), but not alkaline phosphatase (ALP), was significantly higher in HEV confirmed cases than in non-HEV confirmed cases. We identified a plasma ALT level of at least 415.5 U/L and AST level of at least 332 U/L; ALT/ALP ratio of at least 5.08 could be used as a guide for the patients diagnosed as DILI to be tested for HEV infection. The previous liver function parameters showed high sensitivity and good specificity.

Conclusion: Hepatitis E virus was detected in suspected DILI cases. The diagnosis of DILI is not secure until HEV testing is done. Liver function parameters can be used as a guide for HEV testing in suspected DILI cases in countries with limited resources.

The Disease-Modifying Therapies of Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis and Liver Injury: A Narrative Review

In this narrative review, we analyze pre-registration and post-marketing data concerning hepatotoxicity of all disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) available for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, including beta interferon, glatiramer acetate, fingolimod, teriflunomide, dimethyl fumarate, cladribine, natalizumab, alemtuzumab, and ocrelizumab. We review the proposed causal mechanisms described in the literature and we also address issues like use of DMTs in patients with viral hepatitis or liver cirrhosis. Most data emerged in the post-marketing phase by reports to national pharmacovigilance agencies and published case reports or case series. Serious liver adverse events are rare, but exact incidence is largely unknown, as are predictive factors. Unfortunately, none of the DMTs currently available for the treatment of multiple sclerosis is free of potential hepatic toxic effects. Cases of acute liver failure have been reported for beta-interferon, fingolimod, natalizumab, alemtuzumab, and ocrelizumab by different mechanisms (idiosyncratic reaction, autoimmune hepatitis, or viral reactivation). Patients with multiple sclerosis should be informed about possible hepatic side effects of their treatment. Most cases of liver injury are idiosyncratic and unpredictable. The specific monitoring schedule for each DMT has been reviewed and the clinician should be ready to recognize clinical symptoms suggestive for liver injury. Not all DMTs are indicated in cirrhotic patients. For some DMTs, screening for hepatitis B virus and hepatitis C virus is required before starting treatment and a monitoring or antiviral prophylaxis schedule has been established. Beta interferon, glatiramer acetate, natalizumab, and alemtuzumab are relatively contraindicated in autoimmune hepatitis due to the risk of disease exacerbation.

Beware of HCV and HEV in Patients with Suspected Drug-Induced Liver Injury

Purpose of Review-

Without a specific biomarker the diagnosis of drug-induced liver injury (DILI) relies on exclusion of other causes of liver injury. This review examines the importance of testing for hepatitis C (HCV) and hepatitis E (HEV) in patients with suspected DILI.

Recent Findings-

Several national DILI registries have reported HCV and HEV infection in patients initially diagnosed with DILI. Particularly in patients with suspected DILI who have acute hepatocellular liver injury, acute HCV and acute HEV infection should be considered even in the absence of traditional risk factors. For HCV infection, testing for HCV RNA and HCV antibody are recommended. For HEV, the high prevalence of HEV IgG antibody means that HEV IgM antibody testing is suggested to exclude this infection.

Summary-

There should be a high clinical suspicion for acute HCV and HEV infection in patients with acute hepatocellular liver injury suspected of being due to DILI.

Low prevalence of hepatitis E in Iceland: a seroepidemiological study

OBJECTIVE

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection has been reported to be more prevalent in the developed countries than previously thought. HEV infection is an important differential diagnosis in patients with drug-induced liver injury (DILI). The prevalence of hepatitis E was investigated in the general population of Iceland, among pig farmers and patients with DILI.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Serum samples were tested for hepatitis E IgG, with two commercial ELISA tests: Diagnostic Bioprobes Srl. (Dia Pro) and the Wantai HEV IgG and subjects repeatedly reactive were tested with an immunoblot assay (RecomLINE). Three groups were tested: (1) healthy volunteers (HV), (2) pig farm workers (PFWs) and (3) patients participating in a nationwide prospective study on DILI.

RESULTS

Overall 291 individuals were tested, HV (n = 195), PFW (n = 21) and DILI (n = 75). Only 6/291 (2.1%) tested positive for IgG antibodies to HEV in all three tests. Three HV were HEV IgG antibody positive and three in the DILI group. One PFW tested positive in the Dia Pro and Wantai tests but not in the immunoblot assay. All but one of the positive individuals in all three tests was either of foreign national origin or had spent extended period of time outside of Iceland.

CONCLUSIONS

The seroprevalence of hepatitis E appears to be lower in Iceland than majority of recent studies in other western countries have demonstrated. This may be due to relative isolation and severe restriction on import of livestock from other countries.

Diagnosis and Management of Drug-Induced Liver Injury (DILI) in Patients with Pre-Existing Liver Disease

The relationship between drugs and pre-existing liver disease is complex, particularly when increased liver tests (LTs) or new symptoms emerge in patients with pre-existing liver disease during drug therapy. This requires two strategies to assess whether these changes are due to drug-induced liver injury (DILI) as a new event or due to flares of the underlying liver disease. Lacking a valid diagnostic biomarker, DILI is a diagnosis of exclusion and requires causality assessment by RUCAM, the Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method, to establish an individual causality grading of the suspected drug(s). Flares of pre-existing liver disease can reliably be assessed in some hepatotropic virus infections by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and antibody titers at the beginning and in the clinical course to ascertain flares during the natural course of the disease. Unfortunately, flares cannot be verified in many other liver diseases such as alcoholic liver disease, since specific tests are unavailable. However, such a diagnostic approach using RUCAM applied to suspected DILI cases includes clinical and biological markers of pre-existing liver diseases and would determine whether drugs or underlying liver diseases caused the LT abnormalities or the new symptoms. More importantly, a clear diagnosis is essential to ensure effective disease management by drug cessation or specific treatment of the flare up due to the underlying disease.

Multiple sclerosis treatment with fingolimod: profile of non-cardiologic adverse events

Fingolimod was the first oral medication approved for management of multiple sclerosis and is currently used by tens of thousands patients worldwide. Fingolimod acts via the sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P) receptor, maintaining peripheral lymphocytes entrapped in the lymph nodes. In consequence, there is a reduction in the infiltration of aggressive lymphocytes into the central nervous system. The drug is safe and effective, and its first hours of use are associated with related to S1P receptors in the heart. This side effect is well known by all doctors prescribing fingolimod. However, the drug has other potential adverse events that, although relatively rare, require awareness from the neurologist. Among these there are infections (herpes simplex, herpes zoster, Cryptococcus, Epstein-Barr virus, hepatitis, Molluscum Contagiosum, and leishmaniosis), lung and thyroid complications, refractory headaches, encephalopathy, vasculopathy, tumefactive lesions in magnetic resonance imaging and ophthalmological disorders. The present review lists the non-cardiologic adverse events that all neurologists prescribing fingolimod should be aware of.

Drug Induced Liver Injury: Can Biomarkers Assist RUCAM in Causality Assessment?

Drug induced liver injury (DILI) is a potentially serious adverse reaction in a few susceptible individuals under therapy by various drugs. Health care professionals facing DILI are confronted with a wealth of drug-unrelated liver diseases with high incidence and prevalence rates, which can confound the DILI diagnosis. Searching for alternative causes is a key element of RUCAM (Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method) to assess rigorously causality in suspected DILI cases. Diagnostic biomarkers as blood tests would be a great help to clinicians, regulators, and pharmaceutical industry would be more comfortable if, in addition to RUCAM, causality of DILI can be confirmed. High specificity and sensitivity are required for any diagnostic biomarker. Although some risk factors are available to evaluate liver safety of drugs in patients, no valid diagnostic or prognostic biomarker exists currently for idiosyncratic DILI when a liver injury occurred. Identifying a biomarker in idiosyncratic DILI requires detailed knowledge of cellular and biochemical disturbances leading to apoptosis or cell necrosis and causing leakage of specific products in blood. As idiosyncratic DILI is typically a human disease and hardly reproducible in animals, pathogenetic events and resulting possible biomarkers remain largely undisclosed. Potential new diagnostic biomarkers should be evaluated in patients with DILI and RUCAM-based established causality. In conclusion, causality assessment in cases of suspected idiosyncratic DILI is still best achieved using RUCAM since specific biomarkers as diagnostic blood tests that could enhance RUCAM results are not yet available.

Hepatitis E virus infection in a patient with suspected drug-induced liver injury

A 58 years old woman, known case of multiple sclerosis, was referred to the acute medical assessment unit for worsening liver function. She was recently started on a new drug (fingolimod) for multiple sclerosis. After excluding common causes of acute hepatitis in the community, a working diagnosis of drug-induced liver injury was made. When liver enzymes kept rising, further investigations were carried out, which revealed acute hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection. This finding was unexpected, as this patient had no risk factor to acquire HEV infection and there was not a single case of HEV diagnosed in our hospital since long time. This case report highlights certain issues like, considering rarest possible diagnosis when meeting such clinical case, concern over the infections which were once thought confined to the developing countries and inclusion of HEV workup in the cases of acute hepatitis when baseline workup is inconclusive.

Drug-induced liver injury: Is chronic liver disease a risk factor and a clinical issue?

INTRODUCTION

Clinicians and practitioners caring for patients with chronic liver disease are often unsure whether drug therapy is a hazard that increases their patient's risk for drug-induced liver injury (DILI). Areas covered: We searched for reports of drug induced liver injury, both idiosyncratic and intrinsic, in patients with chronic liver disease including non-alcoholic and alcoholic liver disease, and cirrhosis. Reports we analyzed include statin treatment in patients with fatty liver, acetaminophen use in alcoholic fatty liver, antituberculous drugs in patients with tuberculosis and viral hepatitis, antiviral medications in hepatitis and antiretroviral medications in HIV/AIDS. The most challenging cases we found are drug therapy in patients with decompensated liver cirrhosis. Expert opinion: We identified many case reports and case series discussing a potential increased risk of DILI in patients with pre-existing liver disease. However, most of these reports were retrospective and ambiguous. With few exceptions, we conclude that drugs seem to be well tolerated by the majority of patients with pre-existing, non-cirrhotic chronic liver diseases. Special care is needed for some therapies, however, including antiviral therapy in chronic hepatitis B and C and in decompensated liver cirrhosis with impaired drug metabolism. Prospective studies are warranted to valid our conclusions.

The Pathology of Acute Liver Failure

Acute liver failure (ALF) is a rare and severe liver disease that usually develops in 8 weeks or less in individuals without preexisting liver disease. Its chief causes worldwide are hepatitis virus infections (hepatitis A, B, and E) and drug hepatotoxicity (particularly intentional or unintentional acetaminophen toxicity). Massive hepatic necrosis is often seen in liver specimens in ALF and features marked loss of hepatocytes, variable degrees of inflammation, and a stereotypic proliferation of bile ductular structures (neocholangioles) derived from activated periportal hepatic progenitor cells. This paper reviews the liver pathology in ALF, including forms of zonal necrosis and their etiologies.

Herbal Hepatotoxicity: Clinical Characteristics and Listing Compilation

Herb induced liver injury (HILI) and drug induced liver injury (DILI) share the common characteristic of chemical compounds as their causative agents, which were either produced by the plant or synthetic processes. Both, natural and synthetic chemicals are foreign products to the body and need metabolic degradation to be eliminated. During this process, hepatotoxic metabolites may be generated causing liver injury in susceptible patients. There is uncertainty, whether risk factors such as high lipophilicity or high daily and cumulative doses play a pathogenetic role for HILI, as these are under discussion for DILI. It is also often unclear, whether a HILI case has an idiosyncratic or an intrinsic background. Treatment with herbs of Western medicine or traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) rarely causes elevated liver tests (LT). However, HILI can develop to acute liver failure requiring liver transplantation in single cases. HILI is a diagnosis of exclusion, because clinical features of HILI are not specific as they are also found in many other liver diseases unrelated to herbal use. In strikingly increased liver tests signifying severe liver injury, herbal use has to be stopped. To establish HILI as the cause of liver damage, RUCAM (Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method) is a useful tool. Diagnostic problems may emerge when alternative causes were not carefully excluded and the correct therapy is withheld. Future strategies should focus on RUCAM based causality assessment in suspected HILI cases and more regulatory efforts to provide all herbal medicines and herbal dietary supplements used as medicine with strict regulatory surveillance, considering them as herbal drugs and ascertaining an appropriate risk benefit balance.

The Honolulu Liver Disease Cluster at the Medical Center: Its Mysteries and Challenges

In 2013, physicians at the Honolulu Queen’s Medical Center (QMC) noticed that seven liver disease patients reported the use of OxyELITE Pro (OEP), a widely consumed dietary supplement (DS). Assuming a temporal association between OEP use and disease, they argued that OEP was the cause of this mysterious cluster. Subsequent reexamination, however, has revealed that this QMC cohort is heterogeneous and not a cluster with a single agent causing a single disease. It is heterogeneous because patients used multiple DS’s and drugs and because patients appeared to have suffered from multiple liver diseases: liver cirrhosis, liver failure by acetaminophen, hepatotoxicity by non-steroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), resolving acute viral hepatitis by hepatitis B virus (HBV), herpes simplex virus (HSV), and varicella zoster virus (VZV), and suspected hepatitis E virus (HEV). Failing to exclude these confounders and to consider more viable diagnoses, the QMC physicians may have missed specific treatment options in some of their patients. The QMC physicians unjustifiably upgraded their Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method (RUCAM) causality scores so that all patients would appear to be “probable” for OEP. However, subsequent RUCAM reassessments by our group demonstrated a lack of causality for OEP in the evaluated QMC cases. The QMC’s questionable approaches explain the extraordinary accumulation of suspected OEP cases at the QMC in Hawaii as single place, whereas similar cohorts were not published by any larger US liver center, substantiating that the problem is with the QMC. In this review article, we present and discuss new case data and critically evaluate upcoming developments of problematic regulatory assessments by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Hawaii Department of Health (HDOH), and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), as based on invalid QMC conclusions, clarifying now also basic facts and facilitating constructive discussions.

Hepatitis E Virus Infection as a Possible Cause of Acute Liver Failure in Europe

BACKGROUND & AIMS

In Western countries, infection with the hepatitis E virus (HEV) is considered to be rare and imported from endemic regions. However, the prevalence of HEV infection has increased among adults in central Europe. HEV infection can cause acute liver failure (ALF), but there have been only a few confirmed cases of HEV-associated ALF in Europe. We investigated the number of cases of indeterminate ALF associated with HEV infection.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 80 patients diagnosed with ALF or acute hepatitis at the University Hospital Essen in Germany from November 2006 through December 2013. Clinical data were collected from the hospital databases; archived sera were tested for IgG and IgM against HEV, as well as HEV RNA.

RESULTS

Sera from 12 patients (15%) tested positive for IgG against HEV IgG; 7 of these samples did not test positive for HEV IgM or HEV RNA. Sera from 64 patients (80%) did not test positive for IgG or IgM against HEV or HEV RNA. Sera from 8 patients (10%) tested positive for HEV RNA (only 4 of these were positive for HEV IgG) and had clinical findings to support acute HEV infection.

CONCLUSIONS

In a hospital in Germany, approximately 10% to 15% of patients with ALF had evidence for HEV infection. Serologic tests for IgG against HEV are insufficient to identify or exclude HEV infection; tests for HEV RNA also should be performed on patients with ALF of ambiguous etiology.

The impact of hepatitis E in the liver transplant setting

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection has been identified as a cause of graft hepatitis in liver transplant recipients. The true frequency and clinical importance of HEV infections after liver transplantations is a matter of debate. It is proposed that consumption of HEV-contaminated undercooked meat is a main source for HEV infections in developed countries--which might also account for some hepatitis E cases after organ transplantation. However, HEV is also transmitted by transfusion of blood products, likely representing a previously underestimated risk particularly for patients in the transplant setting. HEV infection can take chronic courses in immunocompromised individuals, associated in some cases with rapid progression to cirrhosis within 1-2 years of infection. Diagnosis in transplanted patients is based on HEV RNA testing as antibody assays are not sensitive enough. Selection of immunosuppressive drugs is important as different compounds may influence viral replication and the course of liver disease. Ribavirin has antiviral activity against HEV and should be administered for at least three months in chronically infected individuals; however, treatment failure may occur. HEV infections have also been linked to a variety of extrahepatic manifestations both during and after resolution of infection. In this review we summarize the emerging data on hepatitis E with a particular focus on the importance of HEV infections for liver transplant recipients.

Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) related acute liver failure: a case series from the US Acute Liver Failure Study Group

PURPOSE

Acute liver failure (ALF) is a rare clinical syndrome associated with a high case fatality rate. Asymptomatic primary infection with Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) is common in the general population while acute hepatitis and jaundice are much less common and ALF has been rarely reported. We reviewed the presenting features as well as clinical outcomes amongst consecutive adults with EBV-related ALF.

METHODS

Amongst the 1,887 adult ALF patients enrolled into the US ALF Study Group from January 1998 to February 2012, there were four patients (0.21 %) with EBV-related ALF. Diagnostic criteria for acute EBV infection included compatible serologies and/or the detection of EBV-encoded RNA (EBER) in liver tissue.

RESULTS

Median patient age was 30 years (range 18-44); 75 % were male, and only 25 % were immunosuppressed. The median presenting ALT was 504 IU/mL (range 156-4,920), median Alk P was 431 (range 136-1,009), and median bilirubin was 17 mg/dL (range 13-22.1). Liver biopsy findings ranged from cholestasis to submassive necrosis with EBER + staining in two of the three samples tested. Although all of the patients were treated with an antiviral agent, two died of ALF, one underwent liver transplantation (LT) and one survived with supportive care and is well at 5 years. A review of the literature identified four additional LT recipients with favorable long-term outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Primary EBV infection accounts for <1 % of consecutive adult ALF cases but is associated with a high case fatality rate. LT is associated with favorable short- and long-term outcomes.

Hepatitis E virus in patients with acute severe liver injury

AIM: To examine the incidence of hepatitis E (HepE) in individuals with acute liver injury severe enough to warrant treatment at a transplant unit.

METHODS: Hepatitis E virus (HEV) is an emerging pathogen in developed countries causing severe illness, particularly in immunocompromised patients or those with underlying chronic liver disease. HepE infection is often under diagnosed, as clinicians can be reluctant to test patients who have not travelled to regions traditionally considered hyperendemic for HepE. There are few data regarding the significance of HEV in patients with very severe acute liver injury in developed countries. Eighty patients with acute severe liver injury attending the Scottish Liver Transplant unit were tested for HEV and anti-HEV IgG and IgM. Severe acute liver injury was defined as a sudden deterioration in liver function confirmed by abnormal liver function tests and coagulopathy or presence of hepatic encephalopathy. Eighty percent of these patients were diagnosed with paracetomol overdose. No patients had a history of chronic or decompensated chronic liver disease at time of sampling. IgG positive samples were quantified against the World Health Organization anti-HEV IgG standard. Samples were screened for HEV viral RNA by quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction.

RESULTS: Four cases of hepatitis E were identified. Three of the four cases were only diagnosed on retrospective testing and were initially erroneously ascribed to drug-induced liver injury and decompensated chronic liver disease, with the cause of the decompensation uncertain. One case was caused by HEV genotype 1 in a traveller returning from Asia, the other three were autochthonous and diagnosed on retrospective testing. In two of these cases (where RNA was detected) HEV was found to be genotype 3, the most prevalent genotype in developed countries. Three patients survived, two of whom had been misdiagnosed as having drug induced liver injury. The fourth patient died from sepsis and liver failure precipitated as a result of hepatitis E infection and previously undiagnosed cirrhosis. Histopathology data to date is limited to mainly that seen for endemic HepE. All patients, with the exception of patient 1, demonstrated characteristics of HepE infection, as seen in previously described locally acquired cases.

CONCLUSION: In patients with acute severe liver injury, HEV testing should be part of the initial diagnostic investigation algorithm irrespective of suspected initial diagnosis, age or travel history.

Hepatitis E infection in liver transplant recipients

Hepatitis E virus (HEV) infection (genotype 3) has been described in developed countries as a cause of chronic hepatitis in recipients of solid organ transplantation (SOT), with the first cases reported in 2008. Immunosuppression seems to play a major role in the pathogenesis of chronic infections. The current gold standard for the diagnosis of HEV infection is the detection of HEV RNA in serum, stools, or both. In liver transplant recipients, HEV infection is considered an uncommon disease; however, a high index of suspicion is needed for patients with graft hepatitis of an unclear etiology. Liver transplant recipients seem more likely to develop chronic HEV after an acute infection, and there is accelerated progression to advanced fibrosis and cirrhosis. A decrease in immunosuppression is considered the first line of treatment, and pegylated interferon can be considered the second line of treatment for liver transplant recipients. At the present time, there are not enough data to recommend treatment with ribavirin for adult liver transplant recipients, although this has been tried in other SOT populations.

Hepatotoxicity of antibiotics: a review and update for the clinician

Collectively, the various classes of antibiotics are a leading cause of drug-induced liver injury (DILI). However, acute antibiotic-associated DILI can be difficult to diagnose, as the course of therapy is usually brief, and other confounding factors are often present. In addition to the broad clinicopathologic spectrum of hepatotoxicity associated with the antimicrobials, the underlying infectious disease being treated may itself be associated with hepatic dysfunction and jaundice. This review provides summarized information on several classes of antimicrobial agents, highlighting new agents causing DILI and updating information on older agents.

Hepatitis e: epidemiology and natural history

Hepatitis E is a disease caused by infection with hepatitis E virus (HEV). The virus has four genotypes, named 1 to 4, with one shared serotype. Genotypes 1 and 2 infect only humans, whereas genotypes 3 and 4 primarily infect several mammalian animals, with occasional transmission to humans. Evidence of infection with HEV has been found in most parts of the world, with two distinct epidemiological patterns. In areas with high disease endemicity, primarily developing countries in Asia and Africa, the disease occurs as outbreaks and as sporadic cases of acute hepatitis, and is caused exclusively by infection with genotypes 1 or 2 HEV, which is acquired through fecal-oral route, usually through contamination of water supplies. The disease in these areas occurs most commonly in young adults, and is particularly severe in pregnant women and persons with pre-existing chronic liver disease; chronic infection has not been reported. In areas with lower endemicity, which are mainly developed areas with robust water supply and sanitation systems, occasional sporadic cases of locally-acquired genotype 3 or 4 HEV infection are observed. The affected persons are often elderly and have other coexisting illnesses. The reservoir of infection in these areas is believed to be in animals, such as pigs, wild boar and deer, with zoonotic transmission to humans, possibly through consumption of undercooked meat. Also, in these areas, persistent HEV infection has been well documented among immunosuppressed persons such as organ transplant recipients, and is believed to lead to chronic liver injury, including liver cirrhosis. Further work is needed to better understand the biological basis underlying these widely-differing epidemiological patterns.